What is "unreasonable" under the 4th Amendment is a matter of court interpretation and federal regs. The INS has broad powers that allow them to do what they did here. Do some more reading. If you don't like this--write your Congressman, and request a stricter interpretation, because ultimately that's what we're talking about.
By the way, remember this bit of heartening 4th amendment news from just a few years ago????:
February 7, 1995 - House Republicans Vote Down Fourth Amendment
During the debate today over the House Republicans' bill about the Exclusionary Rule, the House Black Caucus introduced an amendment to the bill that the Republicans promptly voted down. The amendment turned out to be the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, verbatim. The House Republicans were "chagrined." The vote was 303-121, meaning that a number of Democrats joined the Republicans.
Here's the Fourth Amendment:
Amendment Article 4
Right of Search and Seizure Regulated
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
